I'm not one of those millions of people who want instant gratification. I support Obama so far...the man has been president for 79 days...and I'm reserving judgement on these particular issues for awhile because of the incredible mess Obama inherited after eight years of Republican rule. I never expected to agree with every decision Obama would make as president when I voted for him, and I don't think that will change. At the same time, I am not so arrogant that I pretend to know what it is that has actually been revealed by the wiretaps....if anything. AND I also want the Bush criminals to be put in jail...but that also is going to take time and investigation.

It's up to us, THE PEOPLE, to let our reps know that we do not want illegal wiretapping...period.

I'm not one of those millions of people who want instant gratification. I support Obama so far...the man has been president for 79 days...and I'm reserving judgement on these particular issues for awhile because of the incredible mess Obama inherited after eight years of Republican rule. I never expected to agree with every decision Obama would make as president when I voted for him, and I don't think that will change. At the same time, I am not so arrogant that I pretend to know what it is that has actually been revealed by the wiretaps....if anything. AND I also want the Bush criminals to be put in jail...but that also is going to take time and investigation.

It's up to us, THE PEOPLE, to let our reps know that we do not want illegal wiretapping...period.

What do you think a President McCain would have done differently?

For the record, I voted for President Obama as well.

Mr. Obama need only direct AG Holder to appoint a special prosecutor. This special prosecutor would orchestrate the investigatory process, while Mr. Obama and Congress carried on with other important matters. According to a number of legal experts, some of the Bush crimes will soon become un-prosecutable due to statute of limitation expirations.

Moreover, it appears it's not merely that Mr. Obama hasn't yet gotten to these matters in the midst of the economic and war scenario turmoil. But rather, he's in fact upheld the current overbearing domestic wiretapping policies, encompassing the right to monitor, stockpile, and data mine all of our electronic communications. Eric Holder Justice Department attorneys have already asserted firm adherence to the Bush 'State Secrets' position in recent court cases, one challenging the government's right to wiretap American citizens, and the other challenging the government's involvement in instances of extraordinary rendition and torture. Representatives for the AG told the courts in both cases that such adherence to the same position had been fully vetted by the current administration.

If Mr. Obama refuses to give up the dangerous and unconstitutional powers that Bush and Cheney took for themselves, these tools will remain in place for use by the next corrupt, dictatorial ruler who manipulates a path to the White House. And sooner or later there will be such a person. Whoever this person may be, and no matter how far into the future he or she comes to power, the individual will have carte blanche to utilize these preserved excessive powers in any manner chosen. He or she will thus be capable of undoing many or all of the other corrective measures that Mr. Obama and Congress will have implemented, along with all of the good that may stem from such. In part, this potential will be attributable to Mr. Obama's decision to retain certain unconstitutional presidential powers. It's with these very tools that a US president could conceivably make the Bush/Cheney reign look like child's play.

For the sake of our children and grandchildren, do you think it wise to risk leaving this looming threat alive and well for use by Executive Branch successors? I know I don't. Remember, the pendulum always swings back.

Mr. Obama need only direct AG Holder to appoint a special prosecutor. This special prosecutor would orchestrate the investigatory process, while Mr. Obama and Congress carried on with other important matters. According to a number of legal experts, some of the Bush crimes will soon become un-prosecutable due to statute of limitation expirations.

I am in complete agreement with you about the Justice Department's ways and means to do it. However, I am also concerned that Repubs will consider it a "witch hunt" and possibly find it to be a way to unite in order to win elections in 2010 and 2012. On the other hand, it seems right now that the possibility of anyone, Dem or at least moderate Repub disapproving of at least a special prosecutor to be appointed, as you said, is minimal, especially with the Repub party in such disarray. They lack focus and leadership...and they know their heroes are as guilty as sin...but they would really like to raise a hue and cry about anything in order to distract. Repubs are masters at spin...as we well know. So are their media servants.

Maybe, once the economy gets back on track, and other "clean up" work is accomplished, the Bush-Cheney question will be at the forefront of Obama's agenda. There must be an investigation at least on the same scale as the one launched by Repubs about Clinton's extra-marital affair. But I'm not expecting it to happen during Obama's first year....

powerful Democrat has added his voice to those calling for a federal investigation into reports of torture at Guantanamo Bay and at black site prisons abroad.

In light of the startling revelations that came to light this week with the publishing of a Red Cross report, which documented in gruesome detail interrogation practices such as suffocation by water, beating by collar and prolonged nudity, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow that he would support a Department of Justice investigation into the reported torture.

"President Obama said he doesn‘t want to spend all his time looking back. Fair enough. But he has also said egregious violations should be prosecuted," said Schumer, who is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "The most logical, best place to start is the Justice Department. They haven‘t said if they are going to do it or not ... If they won‘t do it, someone else is going to have to do it. But they should be given the first crack."

_________________

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."Honore de Balzac

"Democrats work to help people who need help. That other party, they work for people who don't need help. That's all there is to it."~Harry S. Truman

I am in complete agreement with you about the Justice Department's ways and means to do it. However, I am also concerned that Repubs will consider it a "witch hunt" and possibly find it to be a way to unite in order to win elections in 2010 and 2012. On the other hand, it seems right now that the possibility of anyone, Dem or at least moderate Repub disapproving of at least a special prosecutor to be appointed, as you said, is minimal, especially with the Repub party in such disarray. They lack focus and leadership...and they know their heroes are as guilty as sin...but they would really like to raise a hue and cry about anything in order to distract. Repubs are masters at spin...as we well know. So are their media servants.

Maybe, once the economy gets back on track, and other "clean up" work is accomplished, the Bush-Cheney question will be at the forefront of Obama's agenda. There must be an investigation at least on the same scale as the one launched by Repubs about Clinton's extra-marital affair. But I'm not expecting it to happen during Obama's first year....

I completely agree with Chuck Schumer.

If your "maybe" pans out, then someone had better appropriately extend the applicable statute of limitations for those alleged crimes that are near expiration. If someone doesn't do this, then I'll conclude that the Obama administration simply isn't interested in pursuing justice in this regard. And if that turns out to be the case, it will be inexcusable and extremely dangerous for the future of America.

Reasonably, that current-administration-vetted position asserted to bar the court systems from trying cases which challenge extraordinary rendition and domestic wiretapping tends to establish Mr. Obama's attitude toward such challenges. That's a bad sign, at best. And it brings to mind yet another point about Mr. Obama. He has seemingly contradicted himself to a great extent. He asserted that "no one is above the law." Immediately thereafter he then stated, "but we need to look forward, not backward." The contradictory element is the fact that by willfully doing nothing to pursue accountability for the Bush crimes, the Obama administration is effectively facilitating an above-the-law status for former administration officials who have committed egregious crimes and serious constitutional violations. So, in my judgment, Mr. Obama's "no one is above the law" statement can only be interpreted to mean that no one, except Executive Branch officials (former, or otherwise), is above the law. Again, I find this an inexcusable attitude. What do you think would happen to a regular citizen who thumbed his or her nose at a congressional subpoena multiple consecutive times? I assure you, it would be a far different response from that in the Karl Rove & Co. matter. There are some serious double standards in place and I've seen little effort to resolve them. But what makes it even worse is when the president tells us those double standards no longer exist and then turns around and facilitates them, himself.

Sadly, wishful thinking and holding a benefit-of-the-doubt perspective result in disappointment much of the time.

I guess I take a little comfort that the most egregious of the crimes, i.e. murder, war crimes, etc. have no statute of limitations. Vincent Bugliosi has made fine legal arguments in his book The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, that prosecution does NOT have to occur at the federal level. He states that any local prosecutor that has had a military death from his jurisdiction as the result of the Iraq invasion and occupation, can and should prosecute on the local level, if only he can find the courage to do so. We should all be sure that Schumer takes precedence over the Leahy whitewash "Truth Commission" which would replace real prosecution.

_________________“I'm not a member of any organized party. I'm a Democrat.”-Will Rogers

I guess I take a little comfort that the most egregious of the crimes, i.e. murder, war crimes, etc. have no statute of limitations. Vincent Bugliosi has made fine legal arguments in his book The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, that prosecution does NOT have to occur at the federal level. He states that any local prosecutor that has had a military death from his jurisdiction as the result of the Iraq invasion and occupation, can and should prosecute on the local level, if only he can find the courage to do so. We should all be sure that Schumer takes precedence over the Leahy whitewash "Truth Commission" which would replace real prosecution.

I agree with you. I've been somewhat following Mr. Bugliosi's book campaign and noble effort. It would be wonderful if a state prosecutor answered his call. However, that would in no way reduce Mr. Obama's responsibility to restore, protect, and defend the United States Constitution. Simply stated, if he doesn't allow his Justice Department to pursue investigations into the Bush crimes, Mr. Obama is neither facilitating justice nor defending our Constitution.

Eugene Robinson says it's time to stop mincing words and start holding the guilty accountable. The business of torture... is too unspeakable to be left unfinished. I agree!

Quote:

It’s no longer possible to mince words, or pretend we didn’t know. The International Committee of the Red Cross concluded in a secret report that the Bush administration’s so-called enhanced interrogation methods, used on “high-value” terrorism suspects, plainly constituted torture. The time for euphemisms is over and the time for accountability has arrived.

The Red Cross report—published this week in its entirety for the first time by The New York Review of Books—is a stunning account of how the Bush administration spat on our laws, traditions and ideals. I realize that many Americans, given the scope of the economic crisis and the ambitions of the new administration, would rather look forward than revisit the past. The business of torture, however, is too unspeakable to be left unfinished.

After years of stonewalling, the Bush administration in October 2006 allowed the Red Cross to interview 14 Guantanamo detainees who had previously been held and interrogated in the CIA’s secret prisons. Among them were several men who almost certainly played major roles in planning and executing the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, including Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshib. Others, such as Abu Zubaydah, now seem to have had less involvement in the attacks than once believed.

The 14 men told remarkably similar stories. After being arrested—whether in Pakistan, Dubai, Thailand or Djibouti—they were blindfolded, shackled and flown to an interrogation center that all of them identified as being in Afghanistan. This was probably the prison facility at the U.S.-run Bagram Air Base north of Kabul. Twelve of the 14 said they were tortured.

Three of the detainees reported being subjected to suffocation by water—the torture known as waterboarding. Abu Zubaydah’s account of the experience is quoted at length in the report: “I was put on what looked like a hospital bed, and strapped down very tightly with belts. A black cloth was then placed over my face and the interrogators used a mineral water bottle to pour water on the cloth so that I could not breathe. After a few minutes the cloth was removed and the bed was rotated into an upright position. The pressure of the straps on my wounds caused severe pain. I vomited. The bed was then again lowered to a horizontal position and the same torture carried out.”

Ten of the detainees said they were forced to stand in an excruciatingly painful position for days at a time, with their hands chained to a bar above their heads. If you don’t believe that’s torture, try it—and see if you last five minutes. One detainee, Walid Bin Attash, has an artificial leg, which he said his CIA jailers sometimes removed to make the “stress standing position” more agonizing.

Nine of the men said they were subjected to daily beatings in the first weeks of their detention. Abu Zubaydah said he was sometimes confined for long periods in boxes designed to constrict his movement—one of them tall and narrow, the other so short that he could only squat in an awkward and painful position.

According to the report, some of the tortures were aided and abetted by “health personnel” whom the detainees believed were doctors or psychologists.

This is barbarity with an ugly sheen of bureaucracy. Mohammed told the Red Cross that before he was waterboarded, one of his CIA interrogators bragged of having received “the green light from Washington” to give the prisoner “a hard time.” Who, precisely, was in the chain of command that gave the order for torture?

And for those who may have missed it, here's another revelation from earlier this year:

Quote:

Documents Prove American Involvement in Repeated Genital Torture

According to an article in tomorrow’s New York Times, documents that the United States and British governments under the Bush, Blair, Obama and Brown administrations have gone to court to prevent from being released support the allegations of Binyam Mohamed, who has been held for seven years in detention without any charges at the Guantanamo Bay facility by our government and who is being released without any charges tomorrow.

The allegations made by Binyam Mohamed, the allegations that the New York Times says classified documents support, are that he was taken to Morocco detention by American agents and, approximately once a month, was stripped naked and cut on the chest and penis with a razor, and that this treatment was documented by American agents who took photographs and said the photographs were to be sent on “to show Washington it's healing.”

If what the New York Times says is true, then there is proof that the United States government has been informed and involved in a system of illegal extraordinary rendition and torture of its detainees, including this detainee who was never charged with any crime. If what the New York Times says is true, then four administrations of the British and American governments have been involved in a coverup to hide the truth from you.

The Obama administration has gone to court to keep Binyam Mohamed from even bringing a case before an American court to see his evidence and hear his testimony. The Obama administration has been pressuring the British government to keep the documentation of Binyam Mohamed’s torture under wraps. Until and unless the Obama administration shifts its policy, it is morally implicated.

The above article was an item appearing at irregulartimes.com on February 22, 2009. It has, however, been corroborated by multiple sources.

On Meet the Press this morning, they ran that clip of President Obama emphatically stating "Words must mean something!" The thing that immediately flashed in my mind were his own words: "No one is above the law." Blatant hypocrisy, perhaps? What else are we to make of his concealment of that which he said he would change? Where's the "transparency" he promised us?

This man is talking out of both sides of his face and I find him to be more dangerous than Bush because Bush was blatantly obvious and clearly retarded. Obama is manipulative, cunning, and very intelligent. Much more dangerous.

The problems listed above started way before Obama, or even Bush for that matter. They actually really kicked into gear under Reagan, continued under Bush I, expanded under Clinton, and exploded under Bush II. Obama is just putting the finishing touches on the destruction of America and the rest of the world so that the New World Order can be implemented.

Of course, if one does not believe that the goal is a NWO then I guess that what was written above is nothing more than the rantings of a conspiracy nut....no matter how much they STATE THAT NOW IS A PERFECT TIME FOR A NEW WORLD ORDER.

Course, thats just me. I know that many here and abroad disagree with this.

_________________CrimsonEagleThe war to end all wars can only be fought on the front-lines of the mind.

The greatest deception they have perpetrated is that we need them. Our greatest mistake is that we believe them.

This was a fantastic 10 minute video on the New World Order. You Tube took it down within 12 hours after I became aware of it.

I find the tens of thousands of internet thought police who continually deny the growth of the surveillance society that has entered the domain of beginning/intermediate stages of a police state to be....interesting and self-fulfilling.

The muscle for the New World Order comes from the thought police under their employ. Some are educated, most are not. Many have a hard time putting together a logical sentence. Yet they are empowered with the jurisdiction to judge thoughts.

_________________"If the people allow private banks to control their currency the banks and corporations will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson

Spanish prosecutors will seek criminal charges against Alberto Gonzales and five high-ranking Bush administration officials for sanctioning torture at Guantánamo.

By Scott Horton.

Spanish prosecutors have decided to press forward with a criminal investigation targeting former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and five top associates over their role in the torture of five Spanish citizens held at Guantánamo, several reliable sources close to the investigation have told The Daily Beast. Their decision is expected to be announced on Tuesday before the Spanish central criminal court, the Audencia Nacional, in Madrid. But the decision is likely to raise concerns with the human-rights community on other points: They will seek to have the case referred to a different judge.

The six defendants—in addition to Gonzales, Federal Appeals Court Judge and former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, University of California law professor and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, former Defense Department general counsel and current Chevron lawyer William J. Haynes II, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff David Addington, and former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith—are accused of having given the green light to the torture and mistreatment of prisoners held in U.S. detention in “the war on terror.”

Quote:

...However, contrary to a claim contained in an editorial on April 8 in the Wall Street Journal, the Obama State Department has been in steady contact with the Spanish government about the case. Shortly after the case was filed on March 17, chief prosecutor Javier Zaragoza was invited to the U.S. embassy in Madrid to brief members of the embassy staff about the matter. A person in attendance at the meeting described the process as “correct and formal.” The Spanish prosecutors briefed the American diplomats on the status of the case, how it arose, the nature of the allegations raised against the former U.S. government officials. The Americans “were basically there just to collect information,” the source stated.The Spanish prosecutors advised the Americans that they would suspend their investigation if at any point the United States were to undertake an investigation of its own into these matters. They pressed to know whether any such investigation was pending. These inquiries met with no answer from the U.S. side.

_________________

"Behind every great fortune lies a great crime."Honore de Balzac

"Democrats work to help people who need help. That other party, they work for people who don't need help. That's all there is to it."~Harry S. Truman

You know, I am finding myself withdrawing from world affairs and concerning myself only with what goes on around my little circle. Obviously, I know this is wrong, and I abhor this behavior in others, but I cannot help but do it. I am so frustrated and sickened by the outside world that I don't think I belong in it anymore.

_________________You can sing the praises of women all day long, but as long as you put a fertilized egg ahead of [their] welfare, you do not really care about them.-Dori 4/07